It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

F-15 and F-16 finally being retired?

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 3 2006 @ 12:12 AM
link   
As stated above by others the F35 and F22 are replacing them but a version of the F35 is also replacing the Harrier.

We didbt build as many F22’s and F35’s because we don’t need as many. We use missiles more and more these days. Keeps our pilots outta harms way and is prolly cheaper( is if you factor in a lost pilot).

And the old planes are used for parts and many can be back into service in a matter of weeks. As stated above, the boneyard actually makes money which is rare for a govt.

Glad to hear the Warthog is going to be sticking around for a few more years to come. Damn good plane, prolly only second to the Spectre in air coverage for ground forces. But the reason you see them at the bone yard is because they are being parted out or are in storage to reduce maintenance costs. They don’t make em anymore so they have to kill others to keep some flying and “Hog up” them as well.




posted on Aug, 3 2006 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
I meant in terms of A2A capability, of course the F-22 can’t be in 5 places at the same time, I believe the AF still says they need 381 F-22’s. If they get that many that's roughly a 1 to 1 replacement for the current F-15C/D fleet, pushing some of the newer Eagles into ANG service would ensue there isn’t a gap. The rest can go to reserve and AMARC.


The Air Force has already been told that it isn't getting anywhere near the number of F-22s it requires. That could of course change in years to come, but I doubt it.



The F-22 is actually getting less expensive, the F-35, well, who know what will happen with that one, right now F-35 projected numbers for the USAF range anywhere from 1,200-1,700. And again the F-15E and A-10 will remain in service until 2025.


The current (and tiny) F-22A fleet already requires an estimated $1Bn to repair faulty titanium wing mesh assemblies, that doesn't equal getting cheaper, they are proving to be horrendously expensive. The F-35 and F-15E are primarily ground pounders - the potential for a gap in the air defence assets is huge with no alternative other than the F-22A.



posted on Aug, 3 2006 @ 09:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Retseh
The current (and tiny) F-22A fleet already requires an estimated $1Bn to repair faulty titanium wing mesh assemblies, that doesn't equal getting cheaper, they are proving to be horrendously expensive.


It actually costs 100 Million to fix, and the USAF isn’t paying for it, the manufacturer who was responsible for the faulty treatment will. The current 'true' cost of the F-22 is around 135 Million. The USAF just signed a multi year contract which will keep the F-22 production line open form 2008-2011 and it will save hundreds of millions in production costs. The USAF has also received more funding for the program and might even sell it oversees. This bird isn’t dead yet, if the AF keeps pushing it might get more F-22’s. BTW you can’t blame the cost of the F-22 on anyone but the politicians, when you order 750 and then change your mind to 183 what do you think will happen to the price?

F-22 Flaw Costs 100 Million

USAF Withholds Millions From Lockheed

USAF Multi-Year Funding

[edit on 3-8-2006 by WestPoint23]



posted on Aug, 3 2006 @ 10:38 AM
link   
Well they might as well make all 750. Unit cost will decrease and then we'll have replacement parts more easily available. It wont cost much more and then we can sell em AFTER we get something better.



posted on Aug, 3 2006 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by VType
What puzzels me is that many of those retired/scrapyard aircraft would be highly welcomed assets to the US's stauchest allies. Yet they sit in the desert wasting away. Canada and Britian alone could use the cababilities and highly increase their Air Forces. Maybe its the Second hand rule at play here.

[edit on 3-4-2006 by VType]

Those jets are useless. They don't sale them because after so much hours of use, those chasis have very much stress for the multiple landings in carriers. They take all the parts inside and use them for other f-15 that are in use and other parts are for allies that have those jets and sell them those spare parts.

[edit on 3-8-2006 by rapture777]



posted on Aug, 4 2006 @ 12:18 PM
link   
I dont tink those F16s and F15s are weary because of carrier landings and takeoffs. To my limited knowlege these are not carrier based aircraft.

I have no doubt that the airframes are worn out. Even land based aircraft need overhauls,inspections and careful maintenance on airframes in particularly vunlurable airframe location.

I think it is more like we dont want to give these aircraft to just anyone out there. Also many nations cannot afford nor maintain them even from a cost perspective. They are just to expensive for most nations to operate. Especially the F15 series of airplanes.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 09:08 AM
link   
reply to post by WestPoint23
 


I think the F-15s wont last much longer. Either the US have to build more F-15s or hurry the production of F/A 22s. The F-15s now are literally falling out of the sky. One F-15 has already disintergrated due to high speeds. The US is unlikely to build new F-15s when the F/A-22 is so close to completion. According to some US military website, retirement age for F-15s is 2012-2017 or earlier if the F-15s start to fall apart. The F-16s will last much longer I think, because they are newer and the F35 is delayed by the F 22. Also, the F-117 has already been retired due to the nearing introduction of the F/A 22 so i think the F-15 should follow soon.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join